Cette thèse analyse les jugements des crimes d’assassinat commis par des hommes qui ont tué des femmes et des femmes qui ont tué des hommes, faits dans le Forum Central de Porto Alegre/RS. On met en relief les discours des agents et on tente de comprendre quels sont les aspects des relations de genre qui sont mis en évidence pour soutenir la thèse de l’accusation et celle de la défense, en expliquant comment l’espace du grand jury contribue également à donner un sens de genre. Grace à des observations systématiques des jugements faits par le jury et l’enregistrement dans des journaux de terrain, on a observé une multiplicité de stratégies discursives des acteurs juridiques qui disputent la vérité dans cet espace du champ. La thèse montre qu’il existe une distinction fondamentale dans les discours produit dans cet espace que mettent les cas en rapport à un contexte de « crimes de trafique » ou de « crimes passionnels ». Cette distinction produit des crimes et des sujets plus acceptables que d’autres. Les discours prononcés dans le jury prennent la forme de récits par opposition et reprennent les rôles de genres de ceux qui sont impliqués, en produisant un changement constant entre les rôles des accusés et des victimes. Les rôles de genre utilisés dans ce discours constituent une ressource de pouvoir importante dans les luttes de pouvoir et les conflits que sont établies dans l’espace du champ, en légitimant ou en discréditant pas seulement le cas impliqués mais les versions des agents qui sont en litige dans cet espace du champ. D’une sociologie du champ juridique de Pierre Bordieu, cette thèse vise à montrer que le jury est constitué comme un espace unique dans le domaine, avec des règles, une dynamique, des enjeux et des acteurs qui appartient à cet espace de jugement pour essayer de reorganiser certaines règles et des relations de pouvoir qui résident dans le champ juridique. / Esta tese analisa julgamentos de homicídio de casos de homens que mataram mulheres e mulheres que mataram homens, realizados no Foro Central do Porto Alegre/RS. O foco da análise repousa nos discursos dos agentes, procurando compreender que aspectos das relações de gênero são trazidos à tona para fundamentar as teses de acusação e defesa, explicitando como o espaço do Tribunal do Júri também contribui para produzir sentidos de gênero. Através de observações sistemáticas das sessões de julgamento pelo Tribunal do Júri e do registro nos diários de campo, foi possível perceber uma multiplicidade de estratégias discursivas dos agentes jurídicos que disputam a verdade neste espaço do campo. A tese mostra que há uma distinção central nos discursos produzidos neste espaço que remetem os casos ou a um contexto dos “crimes do tráfico” ou dos “crimes da paixão”. Tal distinção produz crimes e sujeitos mais aceitáveis do que outros. Os discursos produzidos no júri assumem a forma das narrativas por oposição e retomam os papéis de gênero dos envolvidos, produzindo um deslocamento constante entre os papéis de réus/rés e vítimas. Os papéis de gênero utilizados nestes discursos constituem-se como importante recurso de poder nas lutas e disputas que se estabelecem nesse espaço do campo, legitimando ou desqualificando não apenas os envolvidos nos casos, mas as próprias versões dos agentes que estão em disputa neste espaço do campo. A partir de uma sociologia do campo jurídico de Pierre Bourdieu, esta tese busca mostrar que o Tribunal do Júri se constitui como um espaço diferenciado no campo, com regras, dinâmicas, disputas e atores próprios a este espaço de julgar reconfigurando algumas regras e relações de poder que se estabelecem no campo jurídico. / This dissertation analyses murder trials held at the Central Court of Porto Alegre/RS, in cases where men killed women and women killed men. The analysis focuses the agents’ discourses and tries to understand which aspects of gender relations are brought up to sustain the prosecution’s and defense’s allegations, explaining how the space of the Grand Jury also contributes to create gender meanings. Through systematic observations of the trial sessions by the Jury and field diary annotations, it is possible to perceive a multiplicity of discursive strategies by the legal agents who argue over the truth in this space of the field. The dissertation shows that there is a central distinction in the speeches produced in this space that refer the cases either to a “trafficking crimes” context, or to a “passion crimes” context. This distinction produces crimes and subjects more acceptable than others. The speeches produced within the jury assume the form of narratives through opposition and reclaim the gender roles involved, producing a constant shifting of defendant and victim roles. The gender roles used in these discourses constitute an important power resource in the struggles and disputes that are established in the field space, legitimizing or discrediting not only the people involved in the cases, but the agents’ own versions in dispute. Based on Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology of the legal field, this dissertation aims to show that the jury constitutes itself as a distinct space of judgment in the field, with its own rules, dynamics and actors reconfiguring some of the rules and power relations established within the legal field.

Cette thèse analyse les jugements des crimes d’assassinat commis par des hommes qui ont tué des femmes et des femmes qui ont tué des hommes, faits dans le Forum Central de Porto Alegre/RS. On met en relief les discours des agents et on tente de comprendre quels sont les aspects des relations de genre qui sont mis en évidence pour soutenir la thèse de l’accusation et celle de la défense, en expliquant comment l’espace du grand jury contribue également à donner un sens de genre. Grace à des observations systématiques des jugements faits par le jury et l’enregistrement dans des journaux de terrain, on a observé une multiplicité de stratégies discursives des acteurs juridiques qui disputent la vérité dans cet espace du champ. La thèse montre qu’il existe une distinction fondamentale dans les discours produit dans cet espace que mettent les cas en rapport à un contexte de « crimes de trafique » ou de « crimes passionnels ». Cette distinction produit des crimes et des sujets plus acceptables que d’autres. Les discours prononcés dans le jury prennent la forme de récits par opposition et reprennent les rôles de genres de ceux qui sont impliqués, en produisant un changement constant entre les rôles des accusés et des victimes. Les rôles de genre utilisés dans ce discours constituent une ressource de pouvoir importante dans les luttes de pouvoir et les conflits que sont établies dans l’espace du champ, en légitimant ou en discréditant pas seulement le cas impliqués mais les versions des agents qui sont en litige dans cet espace du champ. D’une sociologie du champ juridique de Pierre Bordieu, cette thèse vise à montrer que le jury est constitué comme un espace unique dans le domaine, avec des règles, une dynamique, des enjeux et des acteurs qui appartient à cet espace de jugement pour essayer de reorganiser certaines règles et des relations de pouvoir qui résident dans le champ juridique. / Esta tese analisa julgamentos de homicídio de casos de homens que mataram mulheres e mulheres que mataram homens, realizados no Foro Central do Porto Alegre/RS. O foco da análise repousa nos discursos dos agentes, procurando compreender que aspectos das relações de gênero são trazidos à tona para fundamentar as teses de acusação e defesa, explicitando como o espaço do Tribunal do Júri também contribui para produzir sentidos de gênero. Através de observações sistemáticas das sessões de julgamento pelo Tribunal do Júri e do registro nos diários de campo, foi possível perceber uma multiplicidade de estratégias discursivas dos agentes jurídicos que disputam a verdade neste espaço do campo. A tese mostra que há uma distinção central nos discursos produzidos neste espaço que remetem os casos ou a um contexto dos “crimes do tráfico” ou dos “crimes da paixão”. Tal distinção produz crimes e sujeitos mais aceitáveis do que outros. Os discursos produzidos no júri assumem a forma das narrativas por oposição e retomam os papéis de gênero dos envolvidos, produzindo um deslocamento constante entre os papéis de réus/rés e vítimas. Os papéis de gênero utilizados nestes discursos constituem-se como importante recurso de poder nas lutas e disputas que se estabelecem nesse espaço do campo, legitimando ou desqualificando não apenas os envolvidos nos casos, mas as próprias versões dos agentes que estão em disputa neste espaço do campo. A partir de uma sociologia do campo jurídico de Pierre Bourdieu, esta tese busca mostrar que o Tribunal do Júri se constitui como um espaço diferenciado no campo, com regras, dinâmicas, disputas e atores próprios a este espaço de julgar reconfigurando algumas regras e relações de poder que se estabelecem no campo jurídico. / This dissertation analyses murder trials held at the Central Court of Porto Alegre/RS, in cases where men killed women and women killed men. The analysis focuses the agents’ discourses and tries to understand which aspects of gender relations are brought up to sustain the prosecution’s and defense’s allegations, explaining how the space of the Grand Jury also contributes to create gender meanings. Through systematic observations of the trial sessions by the Jury and field diary annotations, it is possible to perceive a multiplicity of discursive strategies by the legal agents who argue over the truth in this space of the field. The dissertation shows that there is a central distinction in the speeches produced in this space that refer the cases either to a “trafficking crimes” context, or to a “passion crimes” context. This distinction produces crimes and subjects more acceptable than others. The speeches produced within the jury assume the form of narratives through opposition and reclaim the gender roles involved, producing a constant shifting of defendant and victim roles. The gender roles used in these discourses constitute an important power resource in the struggles and disputes that are established in the field space, legitimizing or discrediting not only the people involved in the cases, but the agents’ own versions in dispute. Based on Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology of the legal field, this dissertation aims to show that the jury constitutes itself as a distinct space of judgment in the field, with its own rules, dynamics and actors reconfiguring some of the rules and power relations established within the legal field.

Cette thèse analyse les jugements des crimes d’assassinat commis par des hommes qui ont tué des femmes et des femmes qui ont tué des hommes, faits dans le Forum Central de Porto Alegre/RS. On met en relief les discours des agents et on tente de comprendre quels sont les aspects des relations de genre qui sont mis en évidence pour soutenir la thèse de l’accusation et celle de la défense, en expliquant comment l’espace du grand jury contribue également à donner un sens de genre. Grace à des observations systématiques des jugements faits par le jury et l’enregistrement dans des journaux de terrain, on a observé une multiplicité de stratégies discursives des acteurs juridiques qui disputent la vérité dans cet espace du champ. La thèse montre qu’il existe une distinction fondamentale dans les discours produit dans cet espace que mettent les cas en rapport à un contexte de « crimes de trafique » ou de « crimes passionnels ». Cette distinction produit des crimes et des sujets plus acceptables que d’autres. Les discours prononcés dans le jury prennent la forme de récits par opposition et reprennent les rôles de genres de ceux qui sont impliqués, en produisant un changement constant entre les rôles des accusés et des victimes. Les rôles de genre utilisés dans ce discours constituent une ressource de pouvoir importante dans les luttes de pouvoir et les conflits que sont établies dans l’espace du champ, en légitimant ou en discréditant pas seulement le cas impliqués mais les versions des agents qui sont en litige dans cet espace du champ. D’une sociologie du champ juridique de Pierre Bordieu, cette thèse vise à montrer que le jury est constitué comme un espace unique dans le domaine, avec des règles, une dynamique, des enjeux et des acteurs qui appartient à cet espace de jugement pour essayer de reorganiser certaines règles et des relations de pouvoir qui résident dans le champ juridique. / Esta tese analisa julgamentos de homicídio de casos de homens que mataram mulheres e mulheres que mataram homens, realizados no Foro Central do Porto Alegre/RS. O foco da análise repousa nos discursos dos agentes, procurando compreender que aspectos das relações de gênero são trazidos à tona para fundamentar as teses de acusação e defesa, explicitando como o espaço do Tribunal do Júri também contribui para produzir sentidos de gênero. Através de observações sistemáticas das sessões de julgamento pelo Tribunal do Júri e do registro nos diários de campo, foi possível perceber uma multiplicidade de estratégias discursivas dos agentes jurídicos que disputam a verdade neste espaço do campo. A tese mostra que há uma distinção central nos discursos produzidos neste espaço que remetem os casos ou a um contexto dos “crimes do tráfico” ou dos “crimes da paixão”. Tal distinção produz crimes e sujeitos mais aceitáveis do que outros. Os discursos produzidos no júri assumem a forma das narrativas por oposição e retomam os papéis de gênero dos envolvidos, produzindo um deslocamento constante entre os papéis de réus/rés e vítimas. Os papéis de gênero utilizados nestes discursos constituem-se como importante recurso de poder nas lutas e disputas que se estabelecem nesse espaço do campo, legitimando ou desqualificando não apenas os envolvidos nos casos, mas as próprias versões dos agentes que estão em disputa neste espaço do campo. A partir de uma sociologia do campo jurídico de Pierre Bourdieu, esta tese busca mostrar que o Tribunal do Júri se constitui como um espaço diferenciado no campo, com regras, dinâmicas, disputas e atores próprios a este espaço de julgar reconfigurando algumas regras e relações de poder que se estabelecem no campo jurídico. / This dissertation analyses murder trials held at the Central Court of Porto Alegre/RS, in cases where men killed women and women killed men. The analysis focuses the agents’ discourses and tries to understand which aspects of gender relations are brought up to sustain the prosecution’s and defense’s allegations, explaining how the space of the Grand Jury also contributes to create gender meanings. Through systematic observations of the trial sessions by the Jury and field diary annotations, it is possible to perceive a multiplicity of discursive strategies by the legal agents who argue over the truth in this space of the field. The dissertation shows that there is a central distinction in the speeches produced in this space that refer the cases either to a “trafficking crimes” context, or to a “passion crimes” context. This distinction produces crimes and subjects more acceptable than others. The speeches produced within the jury assume the form of narratives through opposition and reclaim the gender roles involved, producing a constant shifting of defendant and victim roles. The gender roles used in these discourses constitute an important power resource in the struggles and disputes that are established in the field space, legitimizing or discrediting not only the people involved in the cases, but the agents’ own versions in dispute. Based on Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology of the legal field, this dissertation aims to show that the jury constitutes itself as a distinct space of judgment in the field, with its own rules, dynamics and actors reconfiguring some of the rules and power relations established within the legal field.

L’objectif de cette recherche est de comparer les jurys criminels français et italien à travers une étude socio-anthropologique de la pratique judiciaire observable dans les cours d’assises. Il s’agit de rendre compte des différents aspects de l’expérience vécue par les jurés en étudiant minutieusement le rituel judiciaire ainsi que les interactions et relations qui se jouent entre les profanes et les professionnels de la justice le temps d’une session. Quels sont les résultats principaux qui émergent de la comparaison des jurys populaires français et italien ? Ils sont essentiellement de trois ordres. Premièrement, l’observation du « droit en mouvement » révèle que, malgré les similitudes des deux systèmes étudiés sur le plan théorique, la mise en œuvre pratique de la participation des citoyens au jugement des crimes est différente entre la France et l’Italie. Il est alors possible d’en détailler les mécanismes de fonctionnement au regard de la culture juridique de chacun des pays étudiés et en retour, les caractéristiques de chacun des jurys nous apportent des informations sur les mœurs démocratiques française et italienne. Deuxièmement, le jury populaire apparaît comme une « institution de sociabilité » pour les individus appelés à siéger temporairement à la cour d’assises. Cette dimension socialisante influence de manière décisive l’« expérience authentique » vécue par les jurés, et en fait une « expérience directe » de la souffrance d’autrui et du fonctionnement de la démocratie. Troisièmement, la comparaison des jurys criminels français et italien permet de rappeler la modernité et les enjeux actuels liés à la présence des profanes au sein de l’institution judiciaire. Le jury populaire peut être considéré comme une « institution bonne » capable à la fois de redonner de la crédibilité à l’institution judiciaire, de fournir aux acteurs professionnels la possibilité de « ré enchanter » leur quotidien, et enfin d’orchestrer une prise de conscience individuelle pour les jurés sur l’importance de leur participation pour le maintien du lien social. / The purpose of the research is to compare French and Italian juries through a socio-anthropological study of judicial practice in criminal courts. It reports on the different experiences of jurors by carefully studying court procedure, as well as the interactions and relations between laymen and legal professionals within a session.What are the main findings that emerge from comparing French and Italian juries? They can broadly be divided into three parts. Firstly, observation of "the law in motion" reveals that, despite the theoretical similarities between the two systems, the practicalities of involving citizens in judging crimes are different in France and Italy. It is then possible to examine the mechanics in view of the legal culture in both countries and, in return, the characteristics of their juries give us an insight into France and Italy’s democratic values. Secondly, juries appear to be a "socializing institution" for individuals who are required to attend court. This element of socialization has a decisive influence on the "authentic experience" of jurors, making it a "direct experience" of the suffering of others and the functioning of democracy. Thirdly, comparing French and Italian juries provides an opportunity to reflect on modern times and the current issues surrounding the presence of laymen within the judiciary. Juries may be seen as a "worthy" institution able to restore the credibility of the judicial system, stimulate legal professionals and raise individual awareness amongst jurors of the importance of their participation in maintaining social cohesion. / L’obiettivo di questa ricerca è di mettere a confronto la giuria popolare francese con quella italiana sviluppando uno studio socio-antropologico basato sulla pratica giudiziaria osservabile nelle corte d’assise. Si è cercato di mostrare le differenze nel modo di vivere l’esperienza di giurato osservando accuratamente, per ciascuno dei due contesti, il rituale giudiziario, le interazioni e le relazioni tra componenti laici e togati presenti durante una sessione. Quali sono i principali risultati che emergono del paragone delle giurie popolari francesi e italiane? Ne emergono soprattutto tre. Primo, sebbene ci siano delle somiglianze dell’impianto teorico su cui si fondano i due sistemi della giuria popolare, l’osservazione del “diritto in movimento” rivela quanto il loro funzionamento pratico sia diverso. Si descrivono nei dettagli i meccanismi del funzionamento della giuria popolare mettendoli in rapporto con la cultura giuridica di ogni paese mostrandoci, allo specchio, le caratteristiche dei loro costumi democratici. Secondo, la giuria popolare appare come un’“istituzione di sociabilità” per chi vi prende parte. La dimensione sociale influisce sull’“esperienza autentica” vissuta dai giurati agendo direttamente sul modo di percepire la sofferenza altrui e del funzionamento dei processi democratici. Terzo, il confronto tra giuria francese e italiana ci permette di porre l’accento sull’attuale modernità di questa istituzione e sulle sue implicazioni nella procedura penale. La giuria popolare può essere considerata come un’”istituzione buona” in grado di contribuire all’attendibilità del procedimento giuridico, di conferire autorevolezza alla pratica quotidiana dei magistrati togati e di indurre la consapevolezza, in ogni giudice popolare, dell’importanza della sua partecipazione attiva per il mantenimento del legame sociale.

Au cours de leur formation, les étudiants en soins infirmiers sont soumis à diverses épreuves destinées à valider les compétences et savoirs acquis. Deux de ces épreuves ont lieu sur des terrains de stage. La première, à l'issue du stage, est une évaluation chiffrée et littérale effectuée par l'équipe soignante qui a encadré le stagiaire. Pour la seconde, la mise en situation professionnelle ¤ un jury est constitué. Il se compose de deux personnes, un formateur-soignant qui représente le terrain de stage et un formateur de l¤institut de formation dont dépend le candidat. Le jury observe l'étudiant pendant qu'il réalise des soins, délibère et rend ensuite une décision sous la forme d¤une note argumentée. Les résultats aux diverses épreuves sont pris en compte pour le passage dans l¤année supérieure jusqu'à l'obtention du diplôme d'Etat. Cette thèse est une contribution à une sociologie de l¤évaluation. Elle a pour objectif de mettre en évidence les logiques qui orientent les décisions des évaluateurs et s'appuie notamment sur des observations et entretiens. Les formations par alternance offrent un cadre particulier d'analyse. En effet, les décisions prises concernant le devenir des étudiants engagent à la fois terrains de stage et instituts de formation. La collaboration entre ces deux espaces de la formation ne va pas de soi et révèle parfois des conflits de légitimité dont le stagiaire peut être victime ou bénéficiaire. Les résultats des étudiants en soins infirmiers subissent ainsi un effet évaluateur dont les principaux déterminants sont analysés

The current study examined the relationship of testifier type (expert, character witness) and race. Fifty-three participants were selected via convenience sampling to read four scenarios and answer a series of questions regarding the guilt or innocence of the defendant in each scenario. The scenarios included the absence or presence of racial identifiers and the presence of either a character witness or the testimony of an expert. It was hypothesized that the scenario with the presence of expert testimony will yield more guilty verdicts as well as the effectiveness of the testimony will cause a participant to yield a guiltier verdict. The research concluded that participants rendered more guilty verdicts in the absence of race. Additionally, expert testimony was found to be more effective than the testimony of a character witness even when both testifiers presented the same information.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:29:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Jose Procopio da Silva de Souza Dias.pdf: 956456 bytes, checksum: 25dd32ca95a6f4a172583fa1db10f2ff (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-06-01 / This work addresses the issue of which jurisdictional body is competent to hear a malicious crime against life when the accused is entitled by constitutional precept to a specific forum on account of the exercise of a given position or mandate (special jurisdiction by force of position). Which constitutional provision should prevail: the one set out in article 5, XXXVIII (d), which states that malicious crimes against life are subject to trial by jury, or any other constitutional rule vesting another jurisdictional body with authority to judge an accused who exercises a given position or mandate? The Brazilian Federal Supreme Court (STF) had already tackled this issue and consolidated its stand in Precedent 721. But the assumptions underlying the STF rationale remained a bone of contention. After all, it stands to reason that, in favoring the special jurisdiction by force of position in detriment to trial by jury, perhaps this approach ran counter the most well-ingrained tenets of the Brazilian Constitution by downplaying the importance of trial by jury, which epitomizes the maxim that all power emanates from the people. This work thus makes a historical study of this issue and points out the relevant role played by people s courts in cementing democratic values. Such background is followed by an elaboration on the grounds and precepts of the current rule of law system, to herald the trial by jury as a proper measure of the very dignity of human person. Consequently, this work concludes favorably on the special jurisdiction of trial by jury, which shall prevail over the constitutional jurisdiction by force of position / O presente trabalho buscou enfrentar a questão relativa ao órgão jurisdicional competente para julgar a imputação de crime doloso contra a vida se o acusado for detentor de foro determinado constitucionalmente, por força do exercício de cargo ou mandato (foro por prerrogativa de função). Qual disposição constitucional deve prevalecer: a prevista no artigo 5º. XXXVIII, d , que impõe o Tribunal do Júri como juiz natural dos crimes dolosos contra a vida ou outra norma constitucional que competisse a órgão diverso o julgamento do acusado, dado que detentor de determinado cargo ou mandato? O Supremo Tribunal Federal já havia enfrentado a matéria, entendimento plasmado na Súmula 721. Desconfiávamos das premissas que orientaram o raciocínio do Tribunal. Estimávamos que, ao fazer avultar o foro por prerrogativa de função em detrimento do Tribunal do Júri, poderia ter imposto maus tratos à Constituição, ao não valorar devidamente a importância do Tribunal do Júri, dado que o poder emana do povo. Partimos da reconstrução histórica e constatamos o relevante papel dos tribunais populares na consolidação democrática. Aproximamos estas constatações ao Estado Democrático de Direito vigente, seus fundamentos e princípios para posicionar o Tribunal do Júri como consequência da própria dignidade da pessoa humana. Neste diapasão, segundo concluímos, sua competência é norma especial, em detrimento de foro por prerrogativa de função, mesmo que constitucionalmente estabelecido

Considerando que a biodiversidade está presente em diferentes setores da sociedade, discutir seu conceito, conservação, valoração e uso sustentável, não é uma tarefa simples. Todavia, é necessária, pois os temas relacionados ao meio ambiente são de importância para todas as pessoas, extrapolando os interesses da comunidade científica. Desta forma a educação para a biodiversidade adquire grande relevância, pois implica discutir aspectos sociais, políticos, éticos e estéticos da vida dos cidadãos. Várias pesquisas na área do ensino de ciências têm se preocupado com estas questões. Contudo, são poucos os estudos que investigam como o conceito de biodiversidade é ensinado, problematizado e compreendido por meio de sequências didáticas investigativas aplicadas a espaços formais e não formais de ensino, conjuntamente. Estão ausentes os estudos que investigam os indicadores de alfabetização científica em meio a esta temática, contemplando atividades de ensino diferentes em uma mesma sequência didática. Assim, o presente trabalho visa elucidar alguns destes aspectos tendo por objetivo compreender como ocorre o processo de alfabetização científica acerca do conceito de biodiversidade em uma sequência didática investigativa. Para isso foram analisadas três atividades de ensino de uma sequência didática investigativa que abordou o ensino do conceito de biodiversidade. Tais atividades de ensino envolveram o trabalho de campo, o júri simulado e a produção escrita. Os sujeitos pesquisados foram alunos do sexto ano do ensino fundamental, estudantes de uma escola pública localizada no interior do Estado de São Paulo. Videogravações do trabalho de campo e do júri simulado foram transcritas, assim como as redações elaboradas pelos alunos durante a atividade de produção escrita. Por meio das análises deste material, alguns sub indicadores e indicadores de alfabetização científica foram identificados dando indícios sobre como cada atividade de ensino contribuiu com a alfabetização científica dos alunos. Nas redações também foram encontrados valores atribuídos à biodiversidade. A sequência didática investigativa verificada desenvolveu um trabalho com os alunos envolvendo três âmbitos: procedimental, conceitual e axiológico. / Based on the fact that the biodiversity is present in different sectors of society, the discussion of its concept, conservation, valuation and sustainable use is not a simple task. However, it is necessary because the topics related to the environment are of importance to all people, not only of the scientific community. Thus, the education for biodiversity acquires great importance, since it implies in discussing social, political, ethical and aesthetic values of citizens life. Several researches in science education area have been concerned about these issues. However, only few ones are applied along with formal and non-formal teaching spaces, in order to investigate how the concept of biodiversity is taught, understood and questioned. Moreover, studies investigating the scientific literacy indicators in the midst of this theme, covering different educational activities in the same instructional sequence are missing. In this context, the present work uses an investigative didactic sequence to elucidate some of these aspects by understanding how is the scientific literacy process of the biodiversity concept. Three teaching activities of an investigative didactic sequence were taken into account to address the teaching biodiversity concept, respectively, the fieldwork, the simulated jury and the written production. Students of the sixth grade of an elementary school from a public school located in the State of São Paulo were evaluated along this work. Video recordings of the fieldwork and the simulated jury were transcribed, as well the newsrooms prepared by the students during the written production activity. Through the analysis of this material, some sub and scientific literacy indicators were identified giving clues about how each educational activity contributed to the scientific literacy of the students. During the analysis of the newsrooms, values regarding the biodiversity were found. The investigative didactic sequence production developed a work with students involving three areas: procedural, conceptual and axiological.

The current dissertation had three primary objectives, categorized into two MTurk studies with capital juror-eligible community members: (a) cross-validate the psychometric properties of the JQVV, (b): explore the role of legal attitudes via the JQVV in mock capital sentencing decisions, and (c): examine the JQVV's ability to detect juror social desirability in capital voir dire. Impressively, Study 1 (N = 552) and Study 2 (N = 313) provided strong and consistent evidence for the JQVV's reliability and construct validity. In the mock juror paradigm, punitive legal attitudes on the JQVV (i.e., Crime-Neg, Convict, and Death-Pos), did not directly affect sentencing decisions, however they indirectly influenced the perception of nearly all other legally relevant variables (e.g., evidence type). For example, participants with more punitive criminal justice attitudes evaluated aggravating evidence more favorably which, in turn, increased death sentence verdicts. Study 1 also underscored the concerningly low levels of comprehension jurors have regarding judicial instructions and other relevant legal knowledge (e.g., the definition of aggravating). In Study 2, the support-life and support-death groups evidenced divergent patterns of social desirability, although support-death participants did not dramatically alter their scores between the genuine and social desirability condition. Additionally, the JQVV Pros-Cyn and Justice-Pos scales were moderately effective at identifying social desirability, marking the first ever questionnaire to examine juror response styles. Implications for research, professional practice in capital jury selection, and legal policy are discussed.

The ability of jurors and juries to comprehend and utilise scientific evidence in Australian criminal trials has been examined. From mock jury surveys relating to DNA profiling evidence, it was determined that most respondents were able to comprehend some basic and applied statistics, although their ability was in part related to their knowledge of English and their level of education. The point at which mock jurors were prepared to convict an accused solely on the basis of DNA profiling evidence was examined and found to be low compared with the strength of DNA profiling evidence commonly presented in Australian courts. Mock jurors also demonstrated the ability to process evidence that was presented in a Bayesian framework; commencing with prior odds, introducing new information and culminating in posterior odds. From a survey of Australian forensic scientists, including fraud investigators, it was found that most practitioners' concerns could be addressed by greater pre-trial consultation between experts and legal advocates. Improved knowledge within the legal profession concerning the jargon, principles, procedures, limitations and conclusions to be drawn from different scientific disciplines, prior to presenting this evidence in court, is recommended as the means by which complex evidence can be better adduced from expert witnesses and better presented to juries in criminal trials. Finally, from interviewing actual jurors in criminal trials in the Australian Capital Territory it was determined that where jurors' expectations of scientific evidence, particularly DNA profiling evidence, are not met, high levels of juror frustration and speculation may culminate in hung juries. The adversarial setting of criminal proceedings was also found to produce an environment in which jurors felt that information that would assist them in reaching a verdict was being deliberately withheld. The ability of the jury to ask questions and the allowed nature of those questions were also examined, with the resultant recommendation that juries be given more explicit information at the commencement of trials to inform them about their rights and obligations when asking questions.